4 ms·
Your definition of high performers seems different from the articles. How can someone be a high-performer if they don't maintain a system they are involved with
by NomDePlum 2y ago
Your definition of high performers seems different from the articles. How can someone be a high-performer if they don't maintain a system they are involved with, or consider how it will be maintained by others if they move on?
I see lots of really good Devs who love the details and making sure they are communicated well, writing code that is understandable and time on ensuring regular maintenance and upgrades are carried out or better still automated, but most importantly spreading that knowledge around the team.
It does sound like you have considered these things, just your definition of high performers seems like it could do with a rethink.
- User23 2y agoIn every big company high performer means “ships, a lot.” That’s one of the benefits of a higher job level. You get to claim credit for shipping everything you had a hand in even when your contribution was often little more than organizational presence. Which is to say, being the “face” of the project to upper management.
- NomDePlum 2y agoDoesn't reflect my experience of working in many organisations. Not to say I haven't seen what you describe, but only in the more dysfunctional ones. Maybe the issue is more the "low performing management"